More Stories

Informist, Thursday, Aug. 7, 2025

 

--SC junks Justice Varma's plea vs report to indict him in cash-at-home case 

--SC upholds CJI's recommendation to President for removal of Justice Varma 

 

NEW DELHI – The Supreme Court Thursday dismissed Allahabad High Court Justice Yashwant Varma's petition against an in-house committee report that indicted him following recovery of a huge amount of cash at his residence during a fire incident in March. Further, the top court upheld former chief justice of India Sanjiv Khanna's recommendation to President Droupadi Murmu to initiate proceedings against Justice Varma for his removal as a judge. 

 

The bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih held that the writ petition by Justice Varma was not maintainable and the court found no violation of the petitioner's fundamental rights. Former chief justice Khanna and the inquiry committee "scrupulously followed the process" in the proceedings against Justice Varma, however, the uploading of photographs and videos was non-essential at that time, said the top court. The petitioner should have challenged the upload of photographs and videos at that point of time, the court added.

 

On Jul. 30, the top court had said the arguments raised by Justice Varma against the in-house committee's inquiry could have been raised before the report came out. "When you know that in-house proceedings can trigger impeachment and you think only Parliament can do it, you should have come then and there. The points you are raising are major but it could have been raised before and thus your conduct does not inspire confidence and your conduct says a lot," the bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih said. "You don't want something to spill here. Let Parliament decide. Why should we decide whether it is your money or not. That was not the remit of the committee," the bench had added.

 

Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Justice Varma, argued that the procedure adopted against the judge was in violation of the Indian Constitution. A judge can be removed only as per Article 124 of the Constitution and not through public debates based on a report of the in-house inquiry committee, said Sibal. He argued the inquiry committee's report cannot form the basis of a motion of removal against the judge.

 

Sibal said all the actions such as release of tapes, putting it on a website, public fury, public discussion, media interaction, accusation against judge, findings by public discussing conduct of judges were all contrary to the Constitution. On Sibal's contention that there was no cross-examination held in the committee, the top court had said that it was a preliminary inquiry and there was no question of cross examination.

 

The three-member committee formed by the Supreme Court has said the half-burnt currency notes found in the storeroom of Justice Varma's residence could not have been there without the active consent of the judge and his family. It was impossible for the currency to be planted in the storeroom of his house, which was monitored by the security, it said.

 

The committee said while there might be no direct proof linking the high court judge to the stash, "strong inferential evidence" suggested his "covert or active control" over the money, which belied the trust reposed in him. This amounted to serious judicial misconduct, making a case to initiate the impeachment proceedings, the panel said.

 

In his plea, Justice Varma contested the in-house procedure on inquiry into complaints against judges, saying that it creates a parallel, extra-constitutional mechanism that derogates from the law, exclusively vesting the power for removal of high court judges in Parliament. Justice Varma argued that the in-house procedure does not have the safeguards as provided under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

 

The in-house inquiry committee made the findings without giving him a fair opportunity to respond, said Justice Varma. The committee proceeded in a pre-determined fashion and even without finding any concrete evidence, merely drew adverse inferences against him after reversing the burden of proof, he added.

 

In May, the three-member committee appointed by the Supreme Court had submitted its report to the then chief justice of India 

Sanjiv Khanna, following its investigation into allegations that a large amount of cash was found at Justice Varma's residence after a fire broke out there in March. Thereafter, former chief justice Khanna recommended to President to initiate removal proceedings against him. Justice Varma approached the Supreme Court, challenging the committee's report, the inquiry process conducted by the former chief justice, and the subsequent recommendation made to the President.  End

 

Reported by Surya Tripathi

Edited by Subhojit Sarkar

 

For users of real-time market data terminals, Informist news is available exclusively on the NSE Cogencis WorkStation.

 

Cogencis news is now Informist news. This follows the acquisition of Cogencis Information Services Ltd by NSE Data & Analytics Ltd, a 100% subsidiary of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. As a part of the transaction, the news department of Cogencis has been sold to Informist Media Pvt Ltd.

 

Informist Media Tel +91 (11) 4220-1000

Send comments to feedback@informistmedia.com

 

© Informist Media Pvt. Ltd. 2025. All rights reserved.